Narrative Opinion Summary
Michael Swayze appealed an order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit in Broward County, which denied his motion under Rule 3.850. The appeal was reviewed by the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District. The court affirmed the lower court's decision, with Judges Gross, May, and Kuntz concurring. The ruling is not final until any timely motion for rehearing is resolved. Swayze represented himself in the appeal, while the appellee, the State of Florida, did not require an appearance.
Legal Issues Addressed
Appellate Reviewsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District, reviewed and affirmed the lower court's decision denying the Rule 3.850 motion.
Reasoning: The appeal was reviewed by the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District. The court affirmed the lower court's decision.
Finality of Appellate Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court's decision is not considered final until any timely motion for rehearing is resolved.
Reasoning: The ruling is not final until any timely motion for rehearing is resolved.
Role of Judges in Concurring Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Judges Gross, May, and Kuntz all concurred in the decision to affirm the lower court's ruling.
Reasoning: The court affirmed the lower court's decision, with Judges Gross, May, and Kuntz concurring.
Rule 3.850 Proceedingssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant, Michael Swayze, filed a motion under Rule 3.850, which was denied by the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit in Broward County.
Reasoning: Michael Swayze appealed an order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit in Broward County, which denied his motion under Rule 3.850.
Self-Representation in Appealssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Michael Swayze represented himself in the appeal process.
Reasoning: Swayze represented himself in the appeal.
State Representation in Appealssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellee, the State of Florida, did not require an appearance in this appeal.
Reasoning: The appellee, the State of Florida, did not require an appearance.